Privacy and Safety Experiences and Concerns of U.S. Women Using Generative AI for Seeking Sexual and Reproductive Health Information
Organizations: King’s College London London, United Kingdom · VRAIN, Universitat Politècnica de València & University of Cambridge Valencia, Spain, Cambridge, United Kingdom · INGENIO (CSIC-Universitat Politècnica de València) Valencia, Spain
Abstract
The rapid adoption of generative AI (GenAI) chatbots has reshaped access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) information, particularly following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, as individuals assigned female at birth increasingly turn to online sources. However, existing research remains largely model-centered, paying limited attention to user privacy and safety. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 U.S.-based participants from both restrictive and non-restrictive states who had used GenAI chatbots to seek SRH information. Adoption was influenced by perceived utility, usability, credibility, accessibility, and anthropomorphism, and many participants disclosed sensitive personal SRH details. Participants identified multiple privacy risks, including excessive data collection, government surveillance, profiling, model training, and data commodification. While most participants accepted these risks in exchange for perceived utility, abortion-related queries elicited heightened safety concerns. Few participants employed protective strategies beyond minimizing disclosures or deleting data. Based on these findings, we offer design and policy recommendations, such as health-specific features and stronger moderation practices, to enhance privacy and safety in GenAI-supported SRH information seeking.
Figures & tables
| ID | Most used chatbot | SRH topic(s) | Privacy concern level | Attitude toward abortion as health care | State | Status of abortion access | Gender | Age | Ethnicity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | Meta AI | Menstrual bleeding; cramps; nutrition | 5 (out of 10) | Disagree | Alabama | Banned | Woman | 29 | Black or African American |
| P2 | ChatGPT | Emergency contraception; pregnancy testing | 4 (out of 10) | Agree | Texas | Banned | Woman | 30 | Asian or Asian American |
| P3 | ChatGPT | SRH symptoms (unspecified) | 0 (out of 10) | Strongly Agree | West Virginia | Banned | Non-binary | 29 | White or Caucasian |
| P4 | Gemini | Tubal ligation failure | 7 (out of 10) | Neither Agree or Disagree | Texas | Banned | Woman | 31 | Black or African American |
| P5 | Microsoft Copilot | Menstrual cycles and fertility window | 2 (out of 10) | Strongly Agree | Tennessee | Banned | Woman | 29 | Black or African American |
| P6 | ChatGPT | Menstrual cycles and nutrition | 6 (out of 10) | Strongly Agree | Texas | Banned | Woman | 28 | Asian or Asian American |
| Theme | Description |
|---|---|
| Barriers and facilitators | |
| Utility | Participants frequently found GenAI chatbots effective for seeking SRH information due to their personalization and level of detail. Limitations included reduced effectiveness for serious health needs, absence of “lived experiences,” and limited understanding of personal contexts, which sometimes made responses too generic. |
| Usability | Participants highlighted the ease of use, 24/7 availability, interactive interfaces, and rapid consolidation of information as key reasons for using GenAI chatbots. |
| Credibility | Perceptions of credibility were mixed. Influencing factors included source-level aspects (e.g., company reputation, perceived expertise, origin of information), content-level aspects (e.g., accuracy, timeliness, clarity), and channel-level aspects (e.g., interactivity, ability to self-correct). Participants also noted risks of inaccuracies and hallucinations. |
| Equity and accessibility | Participants appreciated the affordability of GenAI chatbots. Opinions on information equity varied: some viewed chatbots as neutral, while others expressed concerns about bias and state-specific censorship of SRH information. |
| Anthropomorphism | Some participants valued the compassionate and nonjudgmental interaction style of chatbots, whereas others perceived them as robotic. |
Human-AI Interaction
Human-AI interaction studies how people and AI systems communicate, collaborate, make decisions, and shape one another over time.
See all 329 papers